EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Thursday, March 30, 2006
CSU 204
Approved
Minutes
In attendance:
Stephen Bohnenblust, Roger Severns, Paul Hustoles (recorder), Stewart
Ross,
Georgia Holmes, Sonja Meiers, Jim Petersen, Anne O’Meara, Dick Swanson,
Don
Descy, Theresa Salerno, Wayne
Allen, Jean
Haar, Gerald Schneck, Barbara Bergman, Evan Rusch, Ron Nickerson, Chuck
Piehl
(for Brock McMillan), Jim Grabowska, Avra Johnson, Jane Baird (for Penny Knoblich)
Guests: Brandon Ross,
Matt Ward, Walt
Wolff
President Bohnenblust
called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.
1.
Minutes
of February 16, 2006—Severns/Schneck
moved to approve. Passed.
2.
Call
for Additional Items/ Reordering of Agenda—SB: I have five things
to add including:
3.
Campus Climate
Survey—Bohnenblust:
Very few faculty filled this out the first time around (document draft
distributed). We suggested
something about workplace bullying behavior. B.
Ross: We had a lot of questions from students based on
the student’s concerns. Bullying
was not one of the bigger concerns.
We encourage you to answer the survey. We
are here to explain it. Salerno: What are
the plans for this survey being
distributed? B. Ross: We have just
a few samples out there for students, faculty and administrators. Ward: We do have reps from each unit in
the MSSA. We are trying to get a
representative sample before we go ahead.
We want to get this out as soon as possible.
Severns: How are you going to make sure people don’t
fill this out twice. Ward: That’s
a good question. Petersen: Did you consider adding people with
disabilities? Ward: That should be
in there, yes. Bohnenblust: What
timeline do you have for feedback?
Ward: We are getting towards the end of the semester. Wednesday of next week would be good. Bohnenblust: Please email response
directly to the students.
[brandon.ross@mnsu.edu; matthew.ward@mnsu.edu]
3.
President’s
Report
a. Delegate Assembly Report—Bohnenblust: Several of
you
were there. A variety of
resolutions on a myriad of topics passed, as always.
We did accept a budget that has a dues increase of 6.67%. That’s the first increase since 2002. Griffin: That dues increase is like
only one additional deduction for the whole year. Bohnenblust:
We did a fairly good job of not locking in the
negotiators for future contracts.
b. Follow Up on SBS Task
Force—Bohnenblust:
The Task Force,
under chair Kim Greer, has completed its work regarding the hires under
a
previous SBS Dean. Those
individuals have been invited in to correct any errors on their
experience
record.
c. Student Retention Rate—Bohnenblust: We just
got a red
flag on this. Retention rate is
dropping after the freshmen year.
We will hear more about this.
d. IFO Presidential Election
Format
(April 11, 2006)—Bohnenblust:
Nancy Black, the incumbent, is the only one running.
We will have ballots ready to go.
e. Heritage Room Cost—Bohnenblust: We are
technically renting this room. We
are going to be asked to put up some real dollars for this facility. I think that this will be minimal. Meiers: For use like this meeting? Bohnenblust: No, for all use, for a
third of the day. Holmes: Is this
being shared with other bargaining units?
Bohnenblust: Yes. Severns:
But this is the Student Center so the Administration has been picking
up the
cost. Meiers: How does this fit
with what we understood from the beginning? Bohnenblust:
Initially there wasn’t actually going to be an
exchange of money but the cost will be minimal.
4.
IFO
Committee Recommendations
a. Minnesota Online Council – Roland Nord
Bohnenblust: Should we wait to hear from Extended Learning? O’Meara: We just want to make sure we don’t lose our spot on the state board. Bohnenblust: We might have to send out an electronic vote on this.
5.
FACULTY
ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS NEEDED AS OF 1/19/06
a.
College
of Business Needs Representation on the following: General Education;
Institutional Review Board
6.
New
Spring 2006 - APPOINTMENTS
a. Academic
Support Advisors (Institutional Diversity)—Chuck Cantale; Doug Ganss
(Confirmed by electronic vote)
b. Recreation Master Plan
Committee—Gary Rushing
c. Pre-Doctoral
Fellowship Faculty Advisory Committee—Glen Peterson; Betty Young
(AH&N); David Laverny-Rafter (SBS)
d. Search
Committee for Assistant Director of the Career Development Center—
Kathleen (Kitty) Foord (Educ.)
Grabowska/Holmes
moved the slate. Passed.
7.
Discussion
Items
a. Segway Policy—Petersen: They
suggested I
come up with alternate language (document distributed).
First, this is not a skateboard or
bicycle. Second, does any
committee have the right to put out policies without going through
channels? Third, they are banning
them in buildings for everything other than disabilities.
My department owns one and we use it
for various things. Fourth, do
people with disabilities need a permit to be disabled?
Wheelchair users don’t need one. I
am concerned that a recent article
said that McGinn would formulate the final policy.
Does he have the power to do this? We
should come up with what the IFO thinks is the
language. I didn’t make any promises
when I met with VP Trauger.
Severns: I think it is reprehensible that the committee implies
that
this is like a skateboard.
Schneck: This might have a challenge with the disability laws. Hustoles: But it makes sense that we
have some kind of policy on this even though I agree that it should not
come
under skateboards and bicycles.
Segways are not just for the disabled. Nickerson:
These are being used as tools in parks for things
like security. There is more
potential use of these than just for people with disabilities. Piehl: It seems to me that there are
potential issues apart from the disability issues.
There are potential safety issues. Petersen:
The Segway can be used safely. It’s
personal responsibility that is
the issue. Severns: One concern I
have is that a person with a disability should not have to have a
permit. Meiers/Schneck moved the
following language: “Personal Assistive mobility devices may only be
used in
university buildings by those with disabilities, or on university
business, or
to be moved directly to and from storage, or to recharging areas.” Swanson: Will they get into the
disabilities question? Petersen:
The language doesn’t speak to that.
Passed.
b. List of Committees—Bohnenblust: Who has
the right
to bring policies forward? We
don’t even have the Safety Committees listed anywhere.
If you have any kind of group with a
policy, how should that be brought forward? Hustoles:
I am the faculty representative to the Policy
Consultation and Approval Committee.
I can call any policy to our Executive for review.
Believe me, there are hundreds of
policies that we don’t want to examine.
Bohnenblust: So we don’t have to do anything special in that our
mechanisms seem to be working.
However, we are also concerned about the committees we know
nothing
about. We should ask the
Administration to provide a list of all known committees.
I want to reaffirm that unless
otherwise stated, committee appointments are for one year and need to
be
renewed. Petersen: I’m
on the R&R committee but we
only meet once a year. I always
forget I’m on it. Bohnenblust: We
should ask for a list of committees.
We can also make sure that the chair of each committee gets a
copy of
the letter of the faculty member appointed to that committee.
c. IFO Budget
proposal—
Bohnenblust: We are asking the legislature to switch from the current
model to
a voucher system. The state is
supposed to fund on a 2/3 to 1/3 funding model but that is going to be
repealed
and there is no recommended funding proposal from any body at this time. Look at this proposal because it does
have some interesting logic.
d. Doctoral Programs
Spring Retreat
(FA/Extended Cabinet Retreat, Thursday, April 20, 2006 10:00 a.m.- 1:00
p.m.
lunch provided)—Bohnenblust: This would include the Graduate Submeet,
the
Planning Submeet and departments that would get doctoral programs. Graboskwa/Descy moved to endorse
the retreat. Passed.
e. Diversity—Salerno: I just wanted
to know
where the campus Climate Survey was and what about the proposed
legislation
about banning faculty with accents?
Bohnenblust: The IFO passed a resolution at the Delegate
Assembly
rejecting this notion. Salerno: I
heard that the definition of Diversity was going to be narrowed. Rusch: I heard that too. Bohnenblust:
Jackie Lewis did not think
that there was any enthusiasm to do this.
Griffin: We really don’t have a definition but more of a value
statement. However, we just got a
MnSCU definition but I haven’t heard that anything is changing.
f. Online Tuition
Rate Proposal (from
Extended Learning Sub Meet)—Schneck: Currently
MSU has the highest online tuition in the
system. We have the issue of, Are
we marketable? We have put
together a proposal to help with this (document distributed). We have not arrived at a set number yet
but we want to at least get to the in-state levels for online courses. Schneck/Severns moved to accept
the proposal for charging a resident-based market-rate tuition fee. Passed.
g. FIG’s Guidelines—Rusch: Here is the
update
(document distributed). It is now
a competitive grant. We are
reducing it to two deadlines (the same as FRGs). We
would like people to contact Academic Affairs to find out
what the budget limit is before they apply for the grant.
That’s what FRG does. Grabowska: Is
there an assessment piece
on this? Rusch: That has not
changed. We did talk about if
there should be a presentation but we made no decision on this. Griffin: Why couldn’t we make a
suggestion that Academic Affairs post some of the results of the
activities so
that there would be some accountability and also give us some examples
of
successful grants? Rusch: We could
do that. Grabowska: It is
important that we include assessment for all things that deal with
money. Nickerson: The Gen Ed Committee has
looked at assessment reports and we are going to bring forward some
recommendations. We are probably
going to ask the FIG group to give some kind of preference to work that
would
improve gen ed work. Griffin:
Academic Affairs should post these results if they get the reports
anyway. Grabowska: Now that these are
competitive, assessment becomes even more important.
Piehl: Is there a reporting process now? Rusch,
yes, but they just tell Academic
Affairs that they have completed the activity. Nickerson/Griffin
moved to endorse the Committee’s
recommendations. Passed.
h. International Task
Force Report—Bohnenblust:
We do not have anything additional to add at this time.
i. University Search
Procedures—Bohnenblust:
As we do searches, make sure you bring forward any problems. Salerno: This paper (document
distributed) on the Selection Decision Report came to me.
Bohnenblust: Tell HR Director Lamb that
we will bring any other comments to Meet and Confer.
j. Sophomore Success
Project—Walt
Wolff: We were looking at ways to help our retention rate, we decided
to
particularly focus on the sophomores.
First Year Experience is doing a great job and juniors and
seniors are
connected to the departments. With that in mind, we initiated a couple
of
projects (documents distributed).
We sent a Zoomerang survey to about 1,600 sophomores. Eighty-four percent were not
considering transferring. If they
were considering, it was due to their program major, then personal
reasons,
then wanting to move closer to home.
Their biggest challenges were finances, time management and
study
skills. What programs did they
want? They wanted the Strong
Interest Inventory survey, a website and an in-person meeting to
connect with
someone on staff. Sixty-five percent of the responders were living or
had lived
on campus. We have made the Strong
survey free. We then sent an
invitational email and then sent them a postcard. We
had mixed success.
Then we interviewed 1,700 sophomores, initiated phone calls to
all of
them. We are still collecting data on this. We
hope to have 4 to 5 focus groups yet this term. Swanson:
Would you fund the survey for
our Business sophomore classes?
Wolff: Money is always an issue.
Swanson: Should we get the Dean to do it? Wolff:
This can be a great survey for undecided majors. We
got a good deal on the 400 surveys
we provided. Salerno: Who is
responsible for students who can’t get into a program?
Who helps redirect them? Wolff:
SRCs would be one option. First Year
Experience deals with a lot
of undecided majors. Severns: The
kids who get into the college of Business or Nursing are not the
problem. It’s the ones who don’t make it
in. That’s the sort of person who is going
to drop out. Bohnenblust: If you have any proposals that we can
endorse, please
get them to us. Wolff: And
anything you can suggest, let us know.
k. Fall 2006
Orientation (Old Main Village; New
Faculty
Social at Applewood)
—Bohnenblust:
Each
year we need to approve this. Severns/Schneck
moved to continue with the Fall FA orientation format.
Passed. Grabowska/Schneck moved to
once again have the new faculty
social at Applewood. Passed.
l. Evaluation of
President Davenport—Bohnenblust:
This will be the first evaluation since the vote of no-confidence issue
two
years ago. Severns: This is the
year we do the President and “Miscellaneous.”I
write the questions and Bohnenblust is the only one who
actually sees the results (document distributed). Dr. Davenport asked
that the
item on Chief Government Relations Officer be added and I did that. So President Davenport has already seen
this document. Bohnenblust: Administrators have always had a chance see
the
survey and to suggest modifications.
This is more of an information item. This is really President
Davenport’s first evaluation from the faculty. We
need to be thoughtful in the evaluation. Hustoles:
Will it just be President
Davenport at this time? Severns:
Yes, we decided not to really go below the Dean’s level.
m. Workload—Bohnenblust: We did
pass a
Delegate Assembly resolution on this.
Haar: Last time we met we had a lengthy discussion about this. We have prepared something more
(document distributed). Meiers:
When work has been out of load, it has been calculated at a certain
percent of
the base salary. We are trying to
figure it out in-load. We wanted
to look at this in a different way.
So we came up with 4.17% based on the 24 credit hour regular
load. This would be a way to calculate. Schneck: There was a Delegate Assembly
resolution to go to 1.25 hours for IT. Would this effect that? Meiers: No. Holmes:
And this is just continuing education, yes? Meiers:
Yes. Swanson: How is this money
going to work against the budget of the department? Severns: The chair
won’t be
able to put it in unless there is a mechanism for the department to be
reimbursed. Meiers: These are paid from the continuing education
dollars paid
by the schools served. I don’t understand the mechanism on how this
will flow
to the departments. Bohnenblust: This is simpler than we are making it. There is a specific cost associated
with each of us. The Administration has to charge at least enough to
make the
course worth it. Swanson: But we
have to replace the class.
Bohnenblust: Don’t assume that it is a release from a class.
Education
could hire faculty devoted specifically to this.
n. Minnesota Online
Council Work Group—Bohnenblust:
(document distributed) Should I just tell Nord to vote for what he
thinks is
best? Nickerson: Why wouldn’t this
be an individual institution decision?
Schneck: Because a different MnSCU school could proctor your
exam. Bohnenblust: I am going to tell Nord
to
vote the position that he thinks is the most appropriate.
o. Selection of the
FA Negotiator—Bohnenblust:
Can we do this electronically? Severns/Schneck
moved to allow an electronic vote for this. Passed.
11. Informational
Items
a.
Next
Executive Meeting, Thursday, April 13, 2006 @ 3:00 p.m. CSU 204
b. FA
Sponsored Spring 2006 Picnic, Tuesday, May 9, 2006 from 11:30 to 1:30
p.m. in
the Open Mall
The meeting
adjourned at 4:58 p.m.
Paul J. Hustoles
Recording
Secretary